No need for network neutrality

The UK government is in the final stages of creation for its "Digital Britain" report, which will lay out positions on everything from file sharing to broadband. Tucked into the report's interim conclusions are a few nuggets about network neutrality, which has never generated the same heat and light in Europe as it has in the US. The interim report says that "the Government has yet to see a case for legislation in favour of net neutrality. In consequence, unless Ofcom find network operators or ISPs to have Significant Market Power and justify intervention on competition grounds, traffic management will not be prevented."

Instead, ISPs are supposed to disclose clearly what sort of limits they impose on connections. If consumers don't like it, they can choose another ISP.

The BBC doesn't like it, since the throttling allegedly affects the Beeb's own iPlayer "catch-up" Internet service, which offers UK citizens the chance to watch BBC shows online after they have already aired. ISPs don't want iPlayer traffic clogging the tubes, and they've been making noise about it for years. Back in 2007, some tried to squeeze the BBC for cash because of all the traffic iPlayer was generating.

BT's own "fair usage policy" makes all of the restrictions clear, though the company takes issue with any suggestion that it is degrading iPlayer quality. "We do not impose any restrictions that affect the viewing quality of services such as BBC iPlayer or Catch Up on Channel4.com or ITV.com, as these stream at up to 800Kbps," says BT. "However, we do limit the speed of all video streaming to 896Kbps on our Option 1 product, during peak times only, which is between 5pm - midnight every day."

But the BBC says that iPlayer operates at three different speeds, with the top one topping out at 1.5Mbps.

Those that don't like "Option 1"—a 10GB/month plan with P2P throttling, heavy usage throttling, and video streaming limits—can upgrade to a higher-priced plan that "only" has P2P throttling, heavy usage throttling, and a 20GB/month allowance. Or they can choose an unlimited data plan... with P2P throttling and heavy usage throttling. Or they can choose another ISP altogether.

The restrictions are all laid out on the company's website, which makes them totally legal. The approach to this issue taken by UK telecoms regulator Ofcom has been a voluntary code of practice for ISPs that makes sure all speed limits are clear. "ISPs must use their best endeavours to set out clearly, and in a prominent place on their websites (e.g. within help or FAQs sections), information relating to their respective policies on fair usage," says the code.

The BBC might not like it, but in the UK, this is more a business dispute and matter of public pressure than it is a matter of law. In the US, by contrast, attempts to impose even one of these restrictions have been met with strong statements from legislators and even direct intervention in particular cases. Heck, we even have a President who is the "Net Neutralist in Chief."

The UK approach is in part a product of the country's approach to competition. Mandatory line-sharing rules mean that there is more competition among DSL providers than exists in the US, but it's still worth wondering if some form of baseline service requirements might be useful. The throttling of specific protocols, for instance, could have a dramatic effect on innovation; what new company will try to launch a new HD streaming site, for instance, if it knows that several of the country's largest ISPs will throttle the service during peak hours—even though they sell their customers 8Mbps connections?

Originally posted by iseptimus:I'm with BT. For one reason. It is free; on the unlimited pack, have BT Vision free, and free line rental. Yes they suck, but someone was looking for a reason why anyone would be with them

Ok, I wasn't expecting a reason like that. BT seems to have so many restrictions and costs, how do you get it free? "Unlimited Pack" sounds... like there are no limits.

No limits on the cost?

BT sounds exactly like our version of Telstra. Telstra is the biggest ISP in Australia, and they have the worst plans, the smallest download limits, the highest costs, and they even include uploads in their "download" limits - but they have a ridiculous number of customers.

I used to think it was ignorance, but now that the internet is not new, not novel, not nerdy, I have no idea why people would pay $30 a month for 500MB of combined uploads and downloads. That's a day or two of Youtube, and your fucked.